EMPEROR Vs. SURJYA KUMAR SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants before us were tried by Commissioners appointed under the Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1925. They were all charged with conspiracy to wage war against the King ( Section 121-A, I. P. C.) and with waging or abetting the waging of such war ( Section 121, I. P. C.) The appellant Sen was further charged with the murder of Capt. Cameron at Dalghat on 13 June 1932, and with the abetment of the murder of Mrs. Sullivan at Pahartali on 24 September 1932. The appellant Dastidar and the female appellant were charged with the attempted murder at Gahira on 19 May 1933, with the unlawful possession of explosives [ Section 4(b). The Explosive Substances Act, 1908] and with the unlawful possession of arms and ammunition on the same date and at the same place [ Section 19(f), Indian Arms Act 1878]. There is a further charge against the appellant Dastidar of attempting to murder Assistant Sub-Inspector Sasanko Bhattacharji on 6 March 1931.

(2.) The trial began on 15 June 1933. The Commissioners examined 170 witnesses, and in the course of the proceedings 346 documentary and material exhibits were tendered. The Commissioners delivered their judgment on 14 August 1933, convicting the appellants on all charges framed against them with the exception of the charge of attempted murder at Gahira of which the appellant Dastidar and the female appellant were found not guilty and acquitted. They sentenced the male appellants to death under Section 121, I. P. C, and the female appellant to transportation for life under the same section. They passed no separate sentences in respect of the other offences of which the appellants were convicted.

(3.) The only objection taken before the Commissioners as to the form and conduct of the trial was with reference to the charge under Section 4(b), Explosive Substances Act. The Commissioners overruled this objection, and when Mr. Basu for the appellant Dastidar was taking the point before us, the learned Advocate-General for the Crown stated that, inasmuch as no sentence had been passed under that section, he would have no objection if, in order to save the time of the Court, the convictions of the appellant Dastidar and the female appellant under it were set aside, and we thereupon decided to accept this suggestion. We have now to deal with the convictions under the other sections, against all of which the appellants have appealed. In addition, as the male appellants have been sentenced to death, the propriety of their conviction under Section 121, I. P. C, and of the sentences imposed upon them has to be considered by us under Ch. 27, Criminal P. C. The Commissioners have given a detailed account of the events at Chittagong during, the period beginning with the preparations for the Armoury Raid of 18 April 1930 and ending with the arrest of the appellants Tarakeswar Dastidar and Kalpana Dutt on 19 May 1933.